Why Trump's Strategy of Toppling Foreign Regimes Is Falling Short, from Venezuela to Cuba

Summary

Following the successful capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026, the Trump administration enthusiastically embraced regime change as a central pillar of U.S. foreign policy, subsequently attempting to replicate this approach in Iran, with far more destabilizing results. Despite drawing historical parallels to early 20th-century U.S.-Venezuelan relations under Juan Vicente Gómez, analysts argue that Trump's strategy of regime co-optation is unlikely to achieve its stated economic, democratic, or geopolitical objectives in Venezuela, given the country's deteriorating oil infrastructure, reluctant American investors, and the continued authoritarian control maintained by the post-Maduro government under Delcy Rodríguez. The administration's framing of Maduro's capture as a landmark foreign policy victory has generated mixed public reception domestically, with polls showing near-equal approval and disapproval, and a majority of Americans lacking confidence in Trump's ability to manage Venezuela's transition. While the strategy has largely failed to deliver meaningful democratic reform or economic stabilization in Venezuela, it has had one notable downstream consequence: the collapse of Venezuelan fuel subsidies to Cuba has pushed the island nation to a critical breaking point, potentially advancing the long-sought Republican goal of triggering regime collapse in Havana.